any evidence for this? How many are the current WDC, for example? Of course he's going to be in the spotlight.

Honestly, this poor Hamilton the endless victim thing is getting really old

Hamilton drawing unfair criticism RE his lifestyle got old about a 8 years ago tbf.

He chooses to have a high-profile lifestyle, which inevitably comes with criticism. Drivers who shun the limelight don't get stories written about them. This is a surprise? He doesn't get singled out in that regard. Look how much flak Kimi used to get in his drinking and partying days. Or Button, for that matter. Or Irvine etc etc. Only none of them get portrayed as victims.

Kimi got flak? I think he got plaudits. Imagine the reaction if Hamilton went back to party with his mates on a yacht in Monaco half way through a Grand Prix.

And why should a high profile lifestyle draw criticism anyway?

Kimi got loads of flak. Even having an ice-cream on the grid drew mounds of criticism for being unmotivated, lazy etc.

I don't think a high profile lifestyle should draw criticism, as long as no-one is being harmed. But there again I've never understood some people's obsession with celebrity. OTOH, it is an inevitable fact that having a high-profile lifestyle will attract attention and some of that will, again inevitably, be criticism. The point though is that Hamilton is not unique in receiving criticism, so the claims of victimisation are unfounded.

So a driver is just winding up his season, with final interviews, the big FIA gala, and of course, the dumb questions from journalists. So what, every driver signs contracts, every driver faces the day he retires. It is inevitable.

Guys, these are entertainers, and not real or worth getting in a hubris about. What is real is those you can feel and touch, and love.

The man makes a pretty reasonable argument. He's got 4 WDCs, and has pretty much sealed his legacy as a top-tier driver and one who'll make it onto the best drivers lists far into the future. Whatever stats he accumulates from here on will only cement/enhance that legacy, not drastically alter it.

He's got other interests in life that he's passionate about, and is arguably not the kind that wants to live & die racing (e.g. Alonso). Like the title says, enjoy the man's driving while he races, then fair play to him if/when he wants to move on.

The man makes a pretty reasonable argument. He's got 4 WDCs, and has pretty much sealed his legacy as a top-tier driver and one who'll make it onto the best drivers lists far into the future. Whatever stats he accumulates from here on will only cement/enhance that legacy, not drastically alter it.

He's got other interests in life that he's passionate about, and is arguably not the kind that wants to live & die racing (e.g. Alonso). Like the title says, enjoy the man's driving while he races, then fair play to him if/when he wants to move on.

This is all cool, it's some of his fans that get their knickers twisted. Lewis is probably laughing all the way to the bank, while when the first rumours of him retiring at some point surfaced, some fans lost their collective sh*t... It was funny to watch

Hamilton will retire as soon as Mercedes is no longer the best car by a big distance. Ferrari closed the gap a bit, but it would been another spectacular failure if Hamilton didn't win the title this season. Hamilton has always raced F1 in a car capable of winning races unlike Seb and Fernando. He's had it very easy career-wise and will give up the moment he's no longer in a car that is easy to win in.

Then he would have already retired, the Merc wasn't the best by a big distance. It was overall better, but not by much. Similar to some of Vettel's championship winning cars.

That was probably true in the first half of the season. The second half ... not so much.

_________________On Twitter, follow me @GPAmericas for all the latest breaking news and current photos...

Then he would have already retired, the Merc wasn't the best by a big distance. It was overall better, but not by much. Similar to some of Vettel's championship winning cars.

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

Then he would have already retired, the Merc wasn't the best by a big distance. It was overall better, but not by much. Similar to some of Vettel's championship winning cars.

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

About a year ago the Merc was a huge amount more dominant than it was this season, so I'm not quite sure what you're saying. If you mean Vettel's title-winning RBRs were less dominant than the 2016 Mercedes, you're absolutely right, but it's not what anyone was discussing.

If you mean his title-winning RBRs were less dominant than the 2017 Mercedes, I'm not so sure about that one. At least two of them (2011, 2010) had more of a pace advantage, I would say.

Then he would have already retired, the Merc wasn't the best by a big distance. It was overall better, but not by much. Similar to some of Vettel's championship winning cars.

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

Then he would have already retired, the Merc wasn't the best by a big distance. It was overall better, but not by much. Similar to some of Vettel's championship winning cars.

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

About a year ago the Merc was a huge amount more dominant than it was this season, so I'm not quite sure what you're saying. If you mean Vettel's title-winning RBRs were less dominant than the 2016 Mercedes, you're absolutely right, but it's not what anyone was discussing.

If you mean his title-winning RBRs were less dominant than the 2017 Mercedes, I'm not so sure about that one. At least two of them (2011, 2010) had more of a pace advantage, I would say.

Agree on this, as the most obvious point, but I'd also argue that Qualifying isn't great as a single measure if you don't throw in some context. Opinions are grey, but not when they're backed up with the wrong facts 2013 before the tyres were changed was a prime example, this season probably a less extreme example.

Then he would have already retired, the Merc wasn't the best by a big distance. It was overall better, but not by much. Similar to some of Vettel's championship winning cars.

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

About a year ago the Merc was a huge amount more dominant than it was this season, so I'm not quite sure what you're saying. If you mean Vettel's title-winning RBRs were less dominant than the 2016 Mercedes, you're absolutely right, but it's not what anyone was discussing.

If you mean his title-winning RBRs were less dominant than the 2017 Mercedes, I'm not so sure about that one. At least two of them (2011, 2010) had more of a pace advantage, I would say.

Agree on this, as the most obvious point, but I'd also argue that Qualifying isn't great as a single measure if you don't throw in some context. Opinions are grey, but not when they're backed up with the wrong facts 2013 before the tyres were changed was a prime example, this season probably a less extreme example.

I'd just like to know were are these hard facts and numbers that back up what Blinky said for this season?

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

I'd just like to know were are these hard facts and numbers that back up what Blinky said for this season?

RED BULL, 2012Pole positions: 8 out of 20Average gap to pole: +0.277 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Six (Australia, China, Bahrain, Belgium, Italy, Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Never

MERCEDES, 2017Pole positions: 15 out of 20Average gap to pole: -0.212 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Once (Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Four (Baku, Britain, Italy, Abu Dhabi)

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

I'd just like to know were are these hard facts and numbers that back up what Blinky said for this season?

RED BULL, 2012Pole positions: 8 out of 20Average gap to pole: +0.277 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Six (Australia, China, Bahrain, Belgium, Italy, Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Never

MERCEDES, 2017Pole positions: 15 out of 20Average gap to pole: -0.212 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Once (Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Four (Baku, Britain, Italy, Abu Dhabi)

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

The trouble is this is not just a Red Bull/Merc comparison. It is a comparison of the whole packages. Drivers included.

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

I'd just like to know were are these hard facts and numbers that back up what Blinky said for this season?

RED BULL, 2012Pole positions: 8 out of 20Average gap to pole: +0.277 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Six (Australia, China, Bahrain, Belgium, Italy, Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Never

MERCEDES, 2017Pole positions: 15 out of 20Average gap to pole: -0.212 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Once (Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Four (Baku, Britain, Italy, Abu Dhabi)

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

James Allen did a thorough analysis on the RB8 vs MP4-27. Conclusion was the MP4-27 was the fastest car of the both - not by that much but the fastest nonetheless.

Of course McLaren did everything in their power that year to not end up higher than third in the WCC.

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

The trouble is this is not just a Red Bull/Merc comparison. It is a comparison of the whole packages. Drivers included.

That's true, obviously. But the margin is far too large to explain by driver gap. Hamilton is not half a second faster than Vettel in qualifying.

mds wrote:

James Allen did a thorough analysis on the RB8 vs MP4-27. Conclusion was the MP4-27 was the fastest car of the both - not by that much but the fastest nonetheless.

Of course McLaren did everything in their power that year to not end up higher than third in the WCC.

I wouldn't question that, the McLaren was certainly the quickest car in 2012 on raw pace. But that just reinforces the argument that the 2017 Mercedes has more of an advantage over the field than the 2012 Red Bull did, since there is no such car from 2017 you could say was clearly quicker than the Merc. Ferrari was quicker at times, but not over the whole season.

James Allen did a thorough analysis on the RB8 vs MP4-27. Conclusion was the MP4-27 was the fastest car of the both - not by that much but the fastest nonetheless.

Of course McLaren did everything in their power that year to not end up higher than third in the WCC.

I wouldn't question that, the McLaren was certainly the quickest car in 2012 on raw pace. But that just reinforces the argument that the 2017 Mercedes has more of an advantage over the field than the 2012 Red Bull did, since there is no such car from 2017 you could say was clearly quicker than the Merc. Ferrari was quicker at times, but not over the whole season.

I agree - was just adding some extra information to your analysis.

Ferrari undoubtedly made the biggest leap between 2016 and 2017 to the point nobody believed (before the season start) they would be title contenders until they emerged and actually seemed to be. But in the end the Mercedes was the fastest car on single lap pace, as good on race pace, and better on reliability.

I think the main thing that made this season closer was the fact (is it a fact? I don't know - it feels that way to me) that Mercedes didn't get to grips with their car as well and as early as Ferrari did. Ferrari immediately got a handle on the SF70H, whereas the W08 was quite possibly inherently the fastest car from season's start but Mercedes didn't fully understand it and so couldn't consistently get the best out of it in the beginning. They learned over time, and never looked back.

Already in Russia the writing was on the wall that Merc's inherent strengths were still there, and around Austria it became clear to me that Vettel was fighting a losing battle.

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

The trouble is this is not just a Red Bull/Merc comparison. It is a comparison of the whole packages. Drivers included.

That's true, obviously. But the margin is far too large to explain by driver gap. Hamilton is not half a second faster than Vettel in qualifying.

mds wrote:

James Allen did a thorough analysis on the RB8 vs MP4-27. Conclusion was the MP4-27 was the fastest car of the both - not by that much but the fastest nonetheless.

Of course McLaren did everything in their power that year to not end up higher than third in the WCC.

I wouldn't question that, the McLaren was certainly the quickest car in 2012 on raw pace. But that just reinforces the argument that the 2017 Mercedes has more of an advantage over the field than the 2012 Red Bull did, since there is no such car from 2017 you could say was clearly quicker than the Merc. Ferrari was quicker at times, but not over the whole season.

But 'quickest' is exactly where this falls apart. Lewis Hamilton's 2012 was a strange year, I've never seen such an unfortunate run of events take a driver so quietly out of the WDC picture (and in turn, McLaren out of the WCC). There is a history of rocketships with poor reliability, this will heavily skew the pole position figures but doesn't make it any stronger a car overall when it comes to securing points.

I'm not even here arguing over which argument is right, I just have a strong dislike of taking facts which come nowhere close to telling the full story and using them as undeniable evidence for anyone's 'full story'

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

I'd just like to know were are these hard facts and numbers that back up what Blinky said for this season?

RED BULL, 2012Pole positions: 8 out of 20Average gap to pole: +0.277 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Six (Australia, China, Bahrain, Belgium, Italy, Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Never

MERCEDES, 2017Pole positions: 15 out of 20Average gap to pole: -0.212 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Once (Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Four (Baku, Britain, Italy, Abu Dhabi)

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

What happened to the 2010, 2011 and 2013 seasons, nobody has ever said that Red Bull had a dominant car in 2012 in fact the Hamilton/McLaren package was the fastest car for the most part.

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

I'd just like to know were are these hard facts and numbers that back up what Blinky said for this season?

RED BULL, 2012Pole positions: 8 out of 20Average gap to pole: +0.277 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Six (Australia, China, Bahrain, Belgium, Italy, Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Never

MERCEDES, 2017Pole positions: 15 out of 20Average gap to pole: -0.212 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Once (Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Four (Baku, Britain, Italy, Abu Dhabi)

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

What happened to the 2010, 2011 and 2013 seasons, nobody has ever said that Red Bull had a dominant car in 2012 in fact the Hamilton/McLaren package was the fastest car for the most part.

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

I'd just like to know were are these hard facts and numbers that back up what Blinky said for this season?

RED BULL, 2012Pole positions: 8 out of 20Average gap to pole: +0.277 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Six (Australia, China, Bahrain, Belgium, Italy, Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Never

MERCEDES, 2017Pole positions: 15 out of 20Average gap to pole: -0.212 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Once (Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Four (Baku, Britain, Italy, Abu Dhabi)

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

What happened to the 2010, 2011 and 2013 seasons, nobody has ever said that Red Bull had a dominant car in 2012 in fact the Hamilton/McLaren package was the fastest car for the most part.

the comparison was for least dominant seasons?

No it wasn't it somehow got changed to that, the comparison was initially with the 2017 season relative to Vettel's Red Bull seasons then got changed to 2012 the least competitive Red Bull season, it's strange how it got changed.

RED BULL, 2012Pole positions: 8 out of 20Average gap to pole: +0.277 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Six (Australia, China, Bahrain, Belgium, Italy, Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Never

MERCEDES, 2017Pole positions: 15 out of 20Average gap to pole: -0.212 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Once (Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Four (Baku, Britain, Italy, Abu Dhabi)

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

What happened to the 2010, 2011 and 2013 seasons, nobody has ever said that Red Bull had a dominant car in 2012 in fact the Hamilton/McLaren package was the fastest car for the most part.

the comparison was for least dominant seasons?

No it wasn't it somehow got changed to that, the comparison was initially with the 2017 season relative to Vettel's Red Bull seasons then got changed to 2012 the least competitive Red Bull season, it's strange how it got changed.

It's not really that strange, because it's very hard to argue that the Mercs of 2014-2016 weren't vastly more dominant than anything Red Bull ever had. So it's fairly pointless making any comparison with those years. But this year is the first time that Mercedes have faced any kind of competition, so it's the only one that really falls under the microscope

RED BULL, 2012Pole positions: 8 out of 20Average gap to pole: +0.277 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Six (Australia, China, Bahrain, Belgium, Italy, Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Never

MERCEDES, 2017Pole positions: 15 out of 20Average gap to pole: -0.212 secondsTimes over half a second off pole: Once (Singapore)Times on pole by over half a second: Four (Baku, Britain, Italy, Abu Dhabi)

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

What happened to the 2010, 2011 and 2013 seasons, nobody has ever said that Red Bull had a dominant car in 2012 in fact the Hamilton/McLaren package was the fastest car for the most part.

the comparison was for least dominant seasons?

No it wasn't it somehow got changed to that, the comparison was initially with the 2017 season relative to Vettel's Red Bull seasons then got changed to 2012 the least competitive Red Bull season, it's strange how it got changed.

It's not really that strange, because it's very hard to argue that the Mercs of 2014-2016 weren't vastly more dominant than anything Red Bull ever had. So it's fairly pointless making any comparison with those years. But this year is the first time that Mercedes have faced any kind of competition, so it's the only one that really falls under the microscope

So why are we looking to just compare the 2017 season with the 2012 season, the initial comparison was in particular with the 2010 and 2011 seasons I believe but that quickly got sidestepped.

What happened to the 2010, 2011 and 2013 seasons, nobody has ever said that Red Bull had a dominant car in 2012 in fact the Hamilton/McLaren package was the fastest car for the most part.

the comparison was for least dominant seasons?

No it wasn't it somehow got changed to that, the comparison was initially with the 2017 season relative to Vettel's Red Bull seasons then got changed to 2012 the least competitive Red Bull season, it's strange how it got changed.

It's not really that strange, because it's very hard to argue that the Mercs of 2014-2016 weren't vastly more dominant than anything Red Bull ever had. So it's fairly pointless making any comparison with those years. But this year is the first time that Mercedes have faced any kind of competition, so it's the only one that really falls under the microscope

So why are we looking to just compare the 2017 season with the 2012 season, the initial comparison was in particular with the 2010 and 2011 seasons I believe but that quickly got sidestepped.

It got sidestepped from the beginning as Herb is talking about 2017 specifically against Seb's Red Bulll's but Blinky took it as a post about the Mercedes era in general.

He says 'about a year ago...' so unless he's clairvoyant he's not talking about 2017 and just got the wrong end of the stick as to what comparison Herb was making is all.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

What happened to the 2010, 2011 and 2013 seasons, nobody has ever said that Red Bull had a dominant car in 2012 in fact the Hamilton/McLaren package was the fastest car for the most part.

the comparison was for least dominant seasons?

No it wasn't it somehow got changed to that, the comparison was initially with the 2017 season relative to Vettel's Red Bull seasons then got changed to 2012 the least competitive Red Bull season, it's strange how it got changed.

It's not really that strange, because it's very hard to argue that the Mercs of 2014-2016 weren't vastly more dominant than anything Red Bull ever had. So it's fairly pointless making any comparison with those years. But this year is the first time that Mercedes have faced any kind of competition, so it's the only one that really falls under the microscope

So why are we looking to just compare the 2017 season with the 2012 season, the initial comparison was in particular with the 2010 and 2011 seasons I believe but that quickly got sidestepped.

so we're not allowed to discuss other seasons? Personally I think there's room in the thread to consider more

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

I'd just like to know were are these hard facts and numbers that back up what Blinky said for this season?

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

What happened to the 2010, 2011 and 2013 seasons, nobody has ever said that Red Bull had a dominant car in 2012 in fact the Hamilton/McLaren package was the fastest car for the most part.

I figured it was fair to compare like for like. The assertion that I was responding to was broadly that 'Vettel's Red Bull cars were less dominant than the Mercedes'. Both Red Bull and Mercedes had a 4-year spell of dominating the championship (so far, Merc's might not be over), so I think when comparing the two it's reasonable to compare similar years. If you compare instead 2017 (the least dominant season for Merc) to 2011 (the most for Red Bull) then the Mercedes might well come out as less dominant, but that's comparing the absolutely most dominant Red Bull to the only Merc that might not be more dominant. In fact I expect the 2011 RBR had a bigger pace advantage; it had no real competition, the only time over a full season Vettel had a car like that.

I'm not going to put in the time to compare 2011 to 2017 right now, but I expect the 2011 RBR would be a little bit ahead. However, I think 2010 or 2013 would probably not be ahead, and I don't think any of the RBRs were as dominant as the 2016 Merc, the one Blinky was originally talking about.

He and Vettel can probably retire any time and walk away with their heads held high. They have achieved almost everything there is to achieve other than pure records. Maybe Vettel will want to win a championship with Ferrari but that would be it.

Hamilton has shown no desire of wanting to win with any other team as such and he has 4 titles under his belt. It wont shock me one bit if these 2 drivers retire after their existing contracts run out. That will be 2019 for Hamilton and 2020 for Vettel.

And life goes on, there are plenty of young drivers coming though and some old dogs with plenty of speed in F1 right now. As much as I would miss the drivers which I consider to be from my generation, it wont be end of the day. Maybe it helps if you are like me and more of a team guy than a driver guy.

I think yes for Hamilton but not Vettel. Vettel is always saying how lucky he is to be an F1 driver and how amazing it is to drive these cars. He never talks about stopping. Hamilton always hints at moving on.

Vettel is a father though. Too how many children is a bit of a mystery as is family are never seen but he is thought to have two daughters. He may want to spend more time with his family at some point.

I believe Hamilton has more to do during retirement, while Vettel I don't know. Though this is just my gut feeling. I might be very wrong. Either way I hope they both retire before they start losing their speed.

He and Vettel can probably retire any time and walk away with their heads held high. They have achieved almost everything there is to achieve other than pure records. Maybe Vettel will want to win a championship with Ferrari but that would be it.

Hamilton has shown no desire of wanting to win with any other team as such and he has 4 titles under his belt. It wont shock me one bit if these 2 drivers retire after their existing contracts run out. That will be 2019 for Hamilton and 2020 for Vettel.

And life goes on, there are plenty of young drivers coming though and some old dogs with plenty of speed in F1 right now. As much as I would miss the drivers which I consider to be from my generation, it wont be end of the day. Maybe it helps if you are like me and more of a team guy than a driver guy.

I think yes for Hamilton but not Vettel. Vettel is always saying how lucky he is to be an F1 driver and how amazing it is to drive these cars. He never talks about stopping. Hamilton always hints at moving on.

Vettel is a father though. Too how many children is a bit of a mystery as is family are never seen but he is thought to have two daughters. He may want to spend more time with his family at some point.

I believe Hamilton has more to do during retirement, while Vettel I don't know. Though this is just my gut feeling. I might be very wrong. Either way I hope they both retire before they start losing their speed.

Great points made. These guys have nothing left to prove. To see Kimi lose speed/motivation over the course of his career has been horrible to watch. Suzuka 2005 seems like a distant memory now.

No it wasn't it somehow got changed to that, the comparison was initially with the 2017 season relative to Vettel's Red Bull seasons then got changed to 2012 the least competitive Red Bull season, it's strange how it got changed.

It's not really that strange, because it's very hard to argue that the Mercs of 2014-2016 weren't vastly more dominant than anything Red Bull ever had. So it's fairly pointless making any comparison with those years. But this year is the first time that Mercedes have faced any kind of competition, so it's the only one that really falls under the microscope

So why are we looking to just compare the 2017 season with the 2012 season, the initial comparison was in particular with the 2010 and 2011 seasons I believe but that quickly got sidestepped.

It got sidestepped from the beginning as Herb is talking about 2017 specifically against Seb's Red Bulll's but Blinky took it as a post about the Mercedes era in general.

He says 'about a year ago...' so unless he's clairvoyant he's not talking about 2017 and just got the wrong end of the stick as to what comparison Herb was making is all.

No it wasn't it somehow got changed to that, the comparison was initially with the 2017 season relative to Vettel's Red Bull seasons then got changed to 2012 the least competitive Red Bull season, it's strange how it got changed.

It's not really that strange, because it's very hard to argue that the Mercs of 2014-2016 weren't vastly more dominant than anything Red Bull ever had. So it's fairly pointless making any comparison with those years. But this year is the first time that Mercedes have faced any kind of competition, so it's the only one that really falls under the microscope

So why are we looking to just compare the 2017 season with the 2012 season, the initial comparison was in particular with the 2010 and 2011 seasons I believe but that quickly got sidestepped.

so we're not allowed to discuss other seasons? Personally I think there's room in the thread to consider more

Read Lotus49's post and then my reply, why the need to sidestep what Herb originally said?

About a year ago I made an analysis comparing Vettel's Red Bull cars and the current dominant Mercedes. I compared only qualifying times, and the difference was not "but by not much" but significantly appreciable. It is nice to have an opinion but it shatters when up against hard facts and numbers.

I'd just like to know were are these hard facts and numbers that back up what Blinky said for this season?

Those are some hard facts about qualifying, and they do in fact make this year's Merc sound a heck of a lot better than at least one of Seb's title winners. I was actually surprised by how much when I did the numbers; I was expecting a pretty small gap, not a half-second swing in favor of the Mercedes.

What happened to the 2010, 2011 and 2013 seasons, nobody has ever said that Red Bull had a dominant car in 2012 in fact the Hamilton/McLaren package was the fastest car for the most part.

I figured it was fair to compare like for like. The assertion that I was responding to was broadly that 'Vettel's Red Bull cars were less dominant than the Mercedes'. Both Red Bull and Mercedes had a 4-year spell of dominating the championship (so far, Merc's might not be over), so I think when comparing the two it's reasonable to compare similar years. If you compare instead 2017 (the least dominant season for Merc) to 2011 (the most for Red Bull) then the Mercedes might well come out as less dominant, but that's comparing the absolutely most dominant Red Bull to the only Merc that might not be more dominant. In fact I expect the 2011 RBR had a bigger pace advantage; it had no real competition, the only time over a full season Vettel had a car like that.

I'm not going to put in the time to compare 2011 to 2017 right now, but I expect the 2011 RBR would be a little bit ahead. However, I think 2010 or 2013 would probably not be ahead, and I don't think any of the RBRs were as dominant as the 2016 Merc, the one Blinky was originally talking about.

This being Blink that got the wrong end of the stick.

It's quite obvious that the Mercedes years were more dominant however what is interesting is what Herb said about comparing the 2017 Mercedes car with the Red Bull cars, why the comparison was only made with the worse Red Bull car (2012) baffles me.

It was just a comparison of the least dominant cars in each era in response to your request for Blinky's numbers is all.

I assume no-one, including yourself, could be bothered to do the numbers so Exediron picked one comparison point, (the least dominant in each era) for us to discuss.

Not sure why it's a big deal, it's not like he was picking the strongest Merc to put against the weakest RB or anything dodgy to make a false impression.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

He may be motivated to try to beat Schumacher's records, but for most people it won't matter. If Lewis quit at 90 wins and 6 WDC's does that mean Schumacher was better? If Lewis quits at 92 wins and 8 WDC's does that mean Lewis was better? No to both. It means one of them achieved slightly more. He is in the pantheon of the greatest drivers the sport has ever known. Where he ranks among st that pantheon is in the eye of the beholder.

Some people rate Senna or Clark as the best ever and their achievements are not nearly those of either Lewis or Schumacher. I know there is motor sport in heaven and when we die, if we go to heaven we get to watch Lewis, Schumacher, Senna, Prost, Clark ect. all at the height of their powers and that is good viewing and I could not tell you who wins a race or the title.

When Schumacher was racing I hated him and the Ferrari machine (what I thought of it as then) for the things they would do to win off the track and by Schumacher's chops, ect. That being said Schumacher had a talent level I did not see in others for most of his career. You can hate Hamilton for his tactics, but I think anyone can admit he can grab a car by the scruff of its neck and muscle it into places it should not be and there are few, if any of his peers that can do that as well or as consistently, so yeah enjoy him while you can.

It was just a comparison of the least dominant cars in each era in response to your request for Blinky's numbers is all.

I assume no-one, including yourself, could be bothered to do the numbers so Exediron picked one comparison point, (the least dominant in each era) for us to discuss.

Not sure why it's a big deal, it's not like he was picking the strongest Merc to put against the weakest RB or anything dodgy to make a false impression.

Well it was Blinky that put himself forward with all the info while Exediron had already posted before I read Blinky's post.

The point being that nobody addressed what Herb said, they either misread it or sidetracked it.

It doesn't need a deep analysis of anything to realise that the 2017 Mercedes was better than the 2012 Red Bull.

He did but obviously got the wrong end of the stick. Exediron responded to your request for numbers.

They did,including you. Blinky said "about a year ago.." so you knew fine well he wasn't talking about the 2017 car but you were still asking for the numbers anyway(sidetracked) or you just misread it too.

I agree but it was just a talking point for us while waiting on Blinky's response I assumed. Exediron had already disagreed with Blinky's original post and named a couple of seasons he thought the RB was quicker. So comparing the 'least dominant' from each other was just another talking point.

_________________"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967